It seems to me that the data is pretty clear. As freedom goes up, female participation in the sciences goes down. I think that most women don't do a lot of things because they don't generally want to. The ones that want to seem to be doing fine, but there are few of them.

I wasn't aware there were any biological arguments, it is all social/cultural/nurture.

There are heaps and heaps and heaps and heaps of female thinkers, if you do some cursory research. That they are not well known to the general public, is another question.

Philosophy is not the only way to be a thinker, just the most pompous.

On average, women tend to prefer collaborative problem solving. On average, philosophers are windbags who talk past each other making mountains out of molehills and trying to verbally beat each other up.

And of course, there's a sort of natural selection involved where we only get to see the loudest blowhards because they've out-shouted the rest. There are tons of people who are doing philosophy but aren't competing the public arena of it or aren't noticed by the media because they're not being controversial enough to draw attention.

I'm a woman and I'm confused. I know that there's a biological argument but is that really justifiable? — EcceHomo

Justifiable in what sense, that there aren't many female thinkers?

There are plenty of female thinkers! All you have to do is look at past and present. Unfortunately, psychology like philosophy and other social and "hard sciences" these disciplines have for the most part been dominated by men. That doesn't mean there are female contributors to the discipline. Now, when it comes to thinkers you'd have to be particular and specify in which discipline do you inquire where these female thinkers are.

Sadly, we just lost one:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Warnock,_Baroness_Warnock

A List of female thinkers from A to Z

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_women_philosophers

Nobody answered my question. This is like saying "not all men are sexist." yes, we get it, there are many female philosophers, but "many" in relation to what? There's literally 4 or so popular female philosophers in history while theres I-LOST-COUNT many male.

Nobody answered my question. This is like saying "not all men are sexist." yes, we get it, there are many female philosophers, but "many" in relation to what? There's literally 4 or so popular female philosophers in history while theres I-LOST-COUNT many male. — EcceHomo

You asked, "why aren't there many female thinkers today?"

I supplied you with a list.

but "many" in relation to what? There's literally 4 or so popular female philosophers in history while theres I-LOST-COUNT many male. — EcceHomo

Again, I supplied you with a list.

I mean "why aren't there many black inventors?" In actuality there is quite a few, now in terms of notoriety, perhaps their fame is overshadowed by the fact that systemic racism exists. Likewise, female philosophers are overshadowed in a discipline that heavily favored the male mind. Perhaps sexism, and racism are the culprits in why we are unaware of the minority giants of the past and of our time.

"Why aren't there many female thinkers today?"

Is not trying to be a good mother not philosophical enough for you? Just imagine what kind of a mother you would be if you did not apply your thinking skills to the job.

Yes Ana, that's my idea too. Have you heard of "stereotype threat"?

Sir2u, motherhood is different... I even find it insulting of you to say that about women.
And every single person is a philosopher/thinker by your standards.

Sir2u, motherhood is different... I even find it insulting of you to say that about women. — EcceHomo

Shucks lady, now you made me feel guilty. Well not really that much, maybe just a little, no actually not even a little.

How can you be so belittling to the wondrous state of motherhood? If being a mother is not philosophizing then I am not sure that philosophy even exists.
Can't believe that I am being called out for saying that mothers are philosophers, damn, next thing you know I will get shit for saying that cats are cuddly.

And every single person is a philosopher/thinker by your standards. — EcceHomo

Are we not all philosophers then? What sets apart a philosopher from a regular person?

Probably nothing more than the obvious. Preference of interests (the social sciences are now dominated by female students) and the inclination to want to start a family which alters priorities in many individuals.

That said I expect we’ll see a steady rise in more prominent female figures, but that it’ll not reach the level of males.

Also, it could be that too many women get sucked into the “sexism” narrative too easily and become a little ideological about this. Perhaps if more women associated with philosophical discourse turned away from “gender politics” they’d become more prominent?

I don’t really think it matters in the sllightest though tbh. As long as the opportunity and freedom remains for people to choose what they wish to do why worry about this?

Don't you think its a chain reaction? Little girls wouldn't think theyre smart or capable of maths or philosophy if they don't see enough women in the field.

I like how you ignored me when I answered your question directly. Apparently you're looking for confirmation bias.

Don't you think its a chain reaction? Little girls wouldn't think theyre smart or capable of maths or philosophy if they don't see enough women in the field. — EcceHomo

Would that not depend on the parents, the mothers especially. If the mother does not have enough balls to tell her daughters that they can do whatever they like, then maybe I was wrong about mothers being philosophers.
And the same would have to apply to men becoming dress makers, hair stylists and cooks.

How many female truck drivers do you know? Could that be because of lack of role models or is it just because most girls would never dream of driving a truck because it is not glamorous enough?

I like how you ignored me when I answered your question directly. Apparently you're looking for confirmation bias. — Anaxagoras

You might like it but I don't. Seems she has her own agenda and the rest does not count.

I hear you and I agree. I'm not saying I literally like it, was just being facetious about it.

I'm not saying I literally like it, was just being facetious about it. — Anaxagoras

Yeah, I figured that one out. :wink:

Until very recently, philosophy was exclusively fat lazy males rubbing their chins and scratching their heads and pretending idle talk sprinkled with fancy made-up words was somehow productive. What we're experiencing now is a transitional phase between that and something else.

Cuz most females are boring... which is why most of my friends are guys...
Anyway, it’s likely just the culture thing. Most women (and guys more often than not) either don't like it or don't want to show that they like it. Nothing to be worried about imo. Just makes things more interesting.

In addition to what Waya said I think intelligent women, who find a fishing hole full of Big Mouth Bass, we aren't as quick to share it with other females. Quick witted, logic based, creative writing men that are willing to listen to what a woman has to say? Where?
Here. But shhhhhhh!
I don't know about you or Waya but I can tell you the territorial instinct in me is a strong guide when I find a group of intellectual males. Not that any male here on the forum would have ever picked up on that. Female "thinkers" are few and far between but the few there are, are definitely worth knowing.
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum ecceHomo

The most obvious answer is that for some reason or another, biology makes women less interested in the subject. This answer is unpopular, because most people today practice the religion of egalitarianism, so they will call you a bigot for saying so (their word for heretic), but it is the truth.

The evidence shows that sociological reasons are false. For example, I studied physics at university and it was almost all men. There were scholarships available allowing women in physics to basically go for free, but they still didn't want to. There was also ubiquitous pro-female propaganda, and that still wasn't enough. The sociological explanations (not enough female role models, etc) show a lack of understanding of male motivation. When men want to do something, they go do it, with or without role models. The fact that they were pushing for role models, scholarships, and other support is an admission that women as a group are not intrinsically motivated to study physics, because if they were, then these other things would not have mattered.

An explanation for this from evolutionary psychology is that men by nature have to work harder to provide for themselves and to get sex. Men are bigger and stronger (more able to put their will into practice) and women are picker with regards to sex (men have to work hard to impress them). So, men are by nature more interested in understanding how things work and they are competitive and want to prove themselves. The survival of women, in contrast is more dependent on their relationships, since they are less able to get their material needs met by their own hands. This also makes women more malleable under social pressure, since they are more materially dependent. Feminists project the degree to which they are socially malleable onto men, which is why they think that social pressure (like shaming) can turn men into women. When the men don't change much because they aren't wired to respond to this kind of propaganda, the feminists call them sexist and propagandize even harder. But close to 100% of the media has been feminist for decades, which is good evidence that it is not possible to say anything to make men and women behave the same.

This oen is easy, and despite the obvious reality that history has not been kind to women who want to think, there are other considerations at play - mainly already mentioned:

Women tend to not want to wade into conflict, as a recreational choice. Women tend to want to be collaborative. Women tend to not want the confrontations and detail-oriented displays of prowess that come with philosophical (put well earlier) blowing-hard. I don't attach such disparagement to that as others might - I just think its patently obvious men and women differ on average, and that capability has little to do with it, but interest does and there's no harm or foul there.

Please let's discuss this. I think its an important issue and as a female OBSESSED with philosophy, seeing women fall short on it saddens me deeply. I also see many errors in my own self regarding my focus etc. Is it just me or is it all women? There are many things to talk about here. — EcceHomo

I found this study, with data through 2016 (unfortunately).

There seems to be an increasing trend for women to study philosophy- most apparent in the graphs for women choosing it as a major when entering college, and women getting a bachelor's degree. The graph for awarded-PhDs doesn't show a clear trend, but it would make sense for there to be a lag vs the 1st two categories.

This isn't your issue, but the demographics show a worse state of affairs for racial/ethnic minorities than for women.